Argumentation

Abstract

Argumentation may be conceptualized in a range of ways, at least two of which are relevant for science education: first, argumentation as justification, or the evaluation of knowledge claims in the light of available evidence, and, second, argumentation as persuasion of an audience (Erduran and Jime´nez-Aleixandre 2008). Argumentation plays a central role in the building of explanations, models, and theories, as scientists use arguments to relate the evidence they select to justify the claims they reach through use of warrants (Toulmin 1958). In science education, argumentation studies can be framed in two complementary approaches: on the one hand a theoretical approach – grounded in epistemology – about appropriation of scientific practices, that is, epistemic practices associated with producing, communicating, and evaluating knowledge in science, and on the other hand a policy approach (central, for instance, to the Program for Indicators of Student Assessment, PISA) emphasizing the development of scientific competences, in particular the ability of using scientific evidence to draw and communicate conclusions and of identifying the assumptions, evidence, and reasoning behind conclusions. The rationales for argumentation in science education draw also from other fields, such as language sciences, psychology, and science studies. Rather than being a one-way relationship, argumentation studies and science education have the potential to inform these perspectives, leading to fruitful interactions.